What's the difference between a mosque shooting video and a cp video from a "freedom of speech" point of view? - One is perfectly acceptable to host in the name of free speech while the other must be purged with fire. Why not purge both?

Kittykin

kiwifarms.net
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The term "freedom of expression" is sometimes used synonymously but includes any act of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.

There you go. I didn't think this would be necessary since other people in the thread didn't need the reminder, but I guess this way it's impossible to, as you put it, "Split hairs with lefties"
Thank you.
You are conflating premeditated murder and CP? Both of which are crimes, but are confused as to why CP is not to be made available for random viewing nor the murder video. Is that correct?


You're still taking the word pleasure at its face value, like someone literally gets off when they go and check stuff out online out of curiosity. Then let's change the word "pleasure" in "personal satisfaction". Would that be clearer for you?
Wrong. That is your assumption. I am in no way shape or form assuming a literal load blown unless you are referring to CP as you stated. The mosque shooting was political. If some freaks got off to that, that is their deal. The video was notproduced based on the intent that a bunch of naked chimps fap to it.


Based on this and the previous "lefties" remark, should I assume that you think there's some kind of conspiracy behind the video and those that would like it to disappear from the Internet? Because I really don't care about that and it's beside the point of the thread. Just a heads up in case you wanted to bring that up.
You don't care about it, but many are on point when they are suggesting that the actions by the NZ governement were extreme, and it did not end there. It was an active campaign to smear his name in the process. And, that the media is doing so needs to be questioned. Media is not representing the news anywhere near close to the truth of the issue.

Since you refuse to engage in the intellectual exercise this thread was meant to be even when I ask explicitly, I guess I'll take it to you directly: are you saying that, if the shooter started to masturbate on the dead bodies and wanted the video to be a snuff film for sociopaths to get off to, as in it would be intended for pleasure like any cp video, you'd be against it's distribution? What about videos of children abused, but not sexually, as in the are not intended for pleasure? What about if someone made cp for academic purposes and was 100% truthful about it, so it would still be not intended for pleasure? Would they be fair game to host and redistribute then? Tell me what you think about it, where you'd draw the line of acceptability and why.
There is no line of acceptablity when it comes to abusing children. That is a demented mind that seeks out that sort of 'entertainment.' Clearly, there exist many fucked in the head wastes of meat dragging their arses across the face of the earth and harming kids for their own selfish gratification, and many that choose to look the other way; Making them culpable for the crimes.

You are mashing your arguement trying to equate the killings to CP. You can't. They are not even vaguely comparable.

What if killing for the sake of a political statement was intended for sexual release, though? Like some fucked up rp scenario. Would that change your opinion about it?
That is stretching well past the bounds of reason.

I guess this says a lot about the human race, then.
No, that says alot about specific individuals.


This is an old people fallacy where you believe that since before today it was harder to gain the knowledge that, indeed, the world is full of fucked up people, that it wasn't full of fucked up people before today. It's not that the crime rates are increasing, it's just your perception of them that's increasing and mainstream media doesn't help (with their sensationalist titles created to sell more). But objective data showed that this is the best time to be alive and crime hasn't been lower globally. But this is besides the point of the thread.
The world has always been filled with fucked up people, and the punshiment was harsher for their crimes. So, you would need to pick a time period for which you wish to make your argument relevant.


You do know that a lot of children are sold by their parents because they live in a shithole country and by selling their children they get both a lot of money and one less mouth to feed, right? Obviously we don't have official data (that I know of), but I suspect that the percentage of parents guilty of this in third world countries is not... unsubstantial.
Yes, and again, in this part of your argument you will need to make your argument specific to the geography.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
I must be a terrible person because all this argument against the New Zealand Shooting video did was convince me that child porn should be legal to host (but not produce), just in case.
 

Kittykin

kiwifarms.net
Then you run into the problem of the reward for the middleman of hosting criminal activities that are designed with the intent to promote child rape/ abuse , while profiting from it and normalizing it.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
I know but I'm not sure that's a worse problem than suppression of information. Plus if this was out in the open wouldn't that make it easier to catch the actual abusers?
 

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
I know but I'm not sure that's a worse problem than suppression of information. Plus if this was out in the open wouldn't that make it easier to catch the actual abusers?
I think normalization of pedophilia is a worse problem and so is creating more incentive to create child pornography.

Why would it make it easier to catch abusers in any case?
 

goku_black

kiwifarms.net
one is pornography which is for pedos to jerk off to and the other is showing the events of how the massacre happened which is why one is allowed and the other is not
 

The Fool

kiwifarms.net
I think it's a matter of industry, and that CP has a lot more in common with illegal drugs than it does genocide.

How do you industrialize a shooting spree? You can't, that counts as terrorism, and the US already has multiple agencies combating terrorism. You're "allowed" to share a shooting video as far as to share the raw information. Going any further than that, attaching the message "we do this tonight" or something, registers as a threat and therein becomes illegal.

CP is different, CP can be industrialized. It doesn't take much to lure a kid. Hell, you could even be related to the kid. Kids are as abundant, as, say, the supplies needed to synthesize Krokodil (Desomorphine). Children aren't illegal, bleach isn't illegal, but CP and Krokodil are. It's not the raw resource, but what actions you take in order to produce the resource, and how you intend to utilize the resource in order to market and proliferate it.

CP and shooting videos are as different as a licensed doctor versus a back-alley doctor. You can have a kid, you can own a gun, but you can't make CP, and you can't genocide people. Yes, there is an explicit exception between these two laws, and the exception is there to enforce sanity and safety. CP and shooting videos are always argued against because they can enable people. But the difference is, you're most likely to get caught if you plan a shooting spree, whereas CP has already proven itself as a lively and dangerous industry.
 

Mewtwo_Rain

Drown in the cesspool of darkness
kiwifarms.net
Allowing only "useful" speech seems like a worse precedent.
As mentioned though, there are always exceptions to the rules of allowable speech. Hence why speech that causes mass hysteria, and or intention wise violent (or threatening) isn't allowed. It may just be CP is also one of those exceptions, and it's really hard to argue that it shouldn't be an exception to general free speech as saying it should be allowed is very very contentious.
 

Kittykin

kiwifarms.net
As mentioned though, there are always exceptions to the rules of allowable speech. Hence why speech that causes mass hysteria, and or intention wise violent (or threatening) isn't allowed. It may just be CP is also one of those exceptions, and it's really hard to argue that it shouldn't be an exception to general free speech as saying it should be allowed is very very contentious.
Trying yelling "bomb!" in an airport and see how far you get with it.
No bomb, nothing. But where does the funny fellow end up for his efforts?
And why?

CP is a violation of the rights of a child to live without being abused. Sexual abuse / Rape are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. Children cannot protect themselves from fucked up adults. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.

The intent of Free speech is being bastardized to promote that which the 2nd ammendment would put an end to in a variety of cases.
 

Mewtwo_Rain

Drown in the cesspool of darkness
kiwifarms.net
Trying yelling "bomb!" in an airport and see how far you get with it.
No bomb, nothing. But where does the funny fellow end up for his efforts?
And why?

CP is a violation of the rights of a child to live without being abused. Sexual abuse / Rape are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. Children cannot protect themselves from fucked up adults. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.

The intent of Free speech is being bastardized to promote that which the 2nd ammendment would put an end to in a variety of cases.
I don't disagree. I think the intent of my post and point was misunderstood.

I'm saying, those arguing it's "freedom of speech" by allowing CP are missing it is a case where it's hard to argue for its existence. Even within the argument "Muh free speech." There are exceptions the bomb case is exactly that, a violation via mass hysteria. (Or yelling "Fire!" in a theater.)

More or less someone could argue that CP that already exists isn't further harming the child. (I've seen this argument before) and although it is true, it doesn't counter the fact many see it as an exception to the free speech concept and I have to agree. The argument you present could also qualify for people recording a shooting (or recording and preforming shooting.) It's not that it's wrong, it's just not the same concept I'm pointing out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kittykin

Kittykin

kiwifarms.net
I don't disagree. I think the intent of my post and point was misunderstood.

I'm saying, those arguing it's "freedom of speech" by allowing CP are missing it is a case where it's hard to argue for its existence. Even within the argument "Muh free speech." There are exceptions the bomb case is exactly that, a violation via mass hysteria. (Or yelling "Fire!" in a theater.)

More or less someone could argue that CP that already exists isn't further harming the child. (I've seen this argument before) and although it is true, it doesn't counter the fact many see it as an exception to the free speech concept and I have to agree. The argument you present could also qualify for people recording a shooting (or recording and preforming shooting.) It's not that it's wrong, it's just not the same concept I'm pointing out.
Understand your point, however, the fact that the CP is a crime in and of itself with the intent to sexually abuse a child for the gratification of a group of fucked in the head useless pieces of meat is more than enough reason to not allow the 'Free speech' argument. Legal executions are not televised, how can the CP is 'Freedom of Speech" hold up by comparison.

You are well aware it is nothing more than an attempt by the mentally deranged fetish crowd trying to normalize this fucked up crap. Sexual dysfunction tends to breed and spread through suggestion. Lowering the age of consent, teaching of sex and fetish practices to young kids as part of "sex ed" is part and parcel of "normalizing" this crap under the guise of 'tolerance' and 'acceptance.'
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mewtwo_Rain

Mewtwo_Rain

Drown in the cesspool of darkness
kiwifarms.net
Understand your point, however, the fact that the CP is a crime in and of itself with the intent to sexually abuse a child for the gratification of a group of fucked in the head useless pieces of meat is more than enough reason to not allow the 'Free speech' argument. Legal executions are not televised, how can the CP is 'Freedom of Speech" hold up by comparison.

You are well aware it is nothing more than an attempt by the mentally deranged fetish crowd trying to normalize this fucked up crap. Sexual dysfunction tends to breed and spread through suggestion.
More or less I don't disagree with your view on that, I'm just saying I don't buy the "freedom of speech" when it comes to CP because it like the "Bomb" example and the "Fire!" example are all exceptions to fee speech acceptance. The shooting case I can see being allowed to some degree for information purposes , and the like but with CP I fully agree with your stance.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kittykin

Slap47

Hehe xd
kiwifarms.net
CP is a violation of the rights of a child to live without being abused. Sexual abuse / Rape are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. Children cannot protect themselves from fucked up adults. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.
Are you making an exception because its a child? "Traumatic speech" as a limit also seems like a dangerous precedent.
 

ICametoLurk

SCREW YOUR OPTICS, I'M GOING IN
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
It's just sex and shooting people. Dunno what the big deal is.
 

Mysterious Capitalist

Collect [REDACTED] as you pass
kiwifarms.net
CP is a violation of the rights of a child to live without being abused. Sexual abuse / Rape are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. Children cannot protect themselves from fucked up adults. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.
Mass murder is a violation of the rights of people to live without being killed. Murder / Hate crimes are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. People cannot protect themselves from fucked up murderers. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.

Understand your point, however, the fact that the CP is a crime in and of itself with the intent to sexually abuse a child for the gratification of a group of fucked in the head useless pieces of meat is more than enough reason to not allow the 'Free speech' argument. Legal executions are not televised, how can the CP is 'Freedom of Speech" hold up by comparison.
Understand your point, however, the fact that mass murder is a crime in and of itself with the intent to kill people to send a political message and for the gratification of whoever is curious enough to watch it (which is usually a lot of people) is more than enough reason to not allow the 'Free speech' argument. Video of violent crimes are not televised, how can mass murder videos is 'Freedom of Speech" hold up by comparison.

So your argument is that we should also ban all videos of crimes? Because that's what New Zealand want, apparently. At least that one video in particular.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
You posted agree on my post and then came to the exact opposite conclusion. I mean, I get it. I don't want child porn to exist either. I just think freedom of information is more important.
 

Kittykin

kiwifarms.net
2 pages have been lost from this thread due to some glitch. Seems you read those posts prior to your reply. Nice word game.
Mass murder is a violation of the rights of people to live without being killed. Murder / Hate crimes are crimes against a person.
Your rights end, where the rights of the other begin. People cannot protect themselves from fucked up murderers. That duty falls to society. If society fails at that, consult the research for the outcome.
Murder is a violation of the right of another where the rights of one end and another begins, such that they can be enforced.

"Hate crimes" do not exist. 'Hate' is an emotion. Crime exists.
Hate crimes and CP are the new seque you are running.


Understand your point, however, the fact that mass murder is a crime in and of itself with the intent to kill people to send a political message and for the gratification of whoever is curious enough to watch it (which is usually a lot of people) is more than enough reason to not allow the 'Free speech' argument. Video of violent crimes are not televised, how can mass murder videos is 'Freedom of Speech" hold up by comparison.

So your argument is that we should also ban all videos of crimes? Because that's what New Zealand want, apparently. At least that one video in particular.
What a crude mulch of an attempt at an arguement. That is pathetic. At NO point in time did I state anything of the sort.

The original OP is with regards to CP and conflating it against a video of killing innocents of a specific group.

CP is violation of the rights of child for the purpose of sexual gratification and profit.
The killing video was in violation of the rights of the murdered, for the purpose of Political exposure.

INTENT is entirely different. The question of intent at present, is the silencing of a political opinion.
 
Last edited:
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino